REDD+ Forest Governance, Network Governance & Community Balance

Introduction: REDD+ and the Risk of Recentralization

"Does REDD+ Threaten to Recentralize Forest Governance?" by Phelps and colleagues examines the phenomenon of the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) movement and how this trend might lead to a disturbing tendency toward the recentralization of decentralized forest management. Ultimately, Phelps and colleagues argue that in order for the proper balance to be achieved, communities need to have ultimate control over the design of REDD+ and the exact manner in which it is implemented. Keeping control at the local level will ensure that the integrity of the environment is maintained both in the present and in the years to come.

Furthermore, Phelps and colleagues advocate for the optimization of REDD+ policies through more intensive research. Finding a sense of harmony is the central imperative. As they write, "There is a tension between the urgency to reduce emissions and science-based REDD+ governance that could benefit millions of forest-dependent people and could reduce forest carbon emissions" (Phelps et al., 2010). Community involvement may help to counter the forces that could lead to the recentralization of governance. Discovering the proper balance is essential across a wide range of environmental issues.

This challenge of balance is similarly addressed in Khan's article, "What Role for Network Governance in Urban Low Carbon Transitions?" Khan describes how, while many cities have been proactive about addressing climate change, the multi-level governance that occurs within major metropolitan centers can restrict real and necessary change from occurring (2012). Khan explores how network governance is a possibility for achieving greater balance as cities attempt to implement more ambitious climate agendas, since network governance can function as a necessary facilitator.

Network Governance and Urban Low-Carbon Transitions

However, network governance is not a perfect solution in this regard and can actually produce mixed consequences in terms of both results and democratic legitimacy (Khan, 2012). As Khan found, "On the implications of network governance for urban low carbon transitions, it is argued that while network governance can contribute to niche developments and innovation at the urban level, the elitist character of networks risks maintaining existing unsustainable patterns and defining possible urban futures in too narrow terms" (2012). This underscores the findings of Phelps and colleagues: discovering the proper balance within governance structures so that real changes are achieved requires a certain degree of give and take.

"The Frontiers of Networked Governance" by Huppe and colleagues addresses precisely this type of governance equilibrium as it applies to the environment. All challenges present within network governance generally stem from issues related to complexity and to social capital (Huppe et al., 2012). As Huppe and colleagues explain, "Social capital is the fabric of trust, shared values and understanding that allows diverse participants to work together towards collective outcomes and common goals" (2012). Thus, more complex challenges require a higher level of social capital to support collaborative processes, and this can be achieved through a carefully maintained balance between stakeholder analysis and social network analysis (Huppe et al., 2012).

Frontiers of Network Governance and Social Capital

The problems caused by a lack of balance are demonstrated clearly by Betsill and Bulkeley in their focus on the Cities for Climate Protection (CCP) program. Their research shows that local governments are more successful within a network when they are increasingly mobilized by financial and political resources (Betsill & Bulkeley, 2004). The researchers find that transnational networks function more harmoniously when there is a proactive effort to achieve balance within global environmental governance (Betsill & Bulkeley, 2004).

These findings are strongly echoed in Busheley's article, "Seeing the Communities for the Carbon," in which he finds that a lack of balance is undermining all governance efforts — a conclusion consistent with a wide range of prior research. Busheley finds that REDD readiness and policy formulation is being conducted in a top-down manner, with insufficient involvement and impact from local communities in the organizational process or in decision-making. His research concludes that a more adaptive, bottom-up approach is necessary for REDD to become economically beneficial, socially equitable, and environmentally sustainable (Busheley, 2013).